venchka
Veteran
The MPP is sold. The good stuff never lasts long. It wasn't light.
katcons
Established
Oh, drat!
This is the reason why I shouldn't go offline anymore! I think I need more research still anyway, and I will log on there soon.Thanks, Chris, Frank, oftheherd.
All of your comments are really helpful.
oftheherd
Veteran
That is a good point I forgot to mention. I think it is available from a couple of places, but when I want to use 9x12, I just cut down 4x5. As much as I like 9x12, it isn't the only thing I ever use, nor even the most used. It is a good alternative to 4x5 when weight is a consideration.
katcons
Established
Hi, guys, thanks. However, I don't have the cojones to cut film, may just mess it up!
I think I have to narrow down my search to 4x5s or 5x7s in the meantime.
However, I don't have the cojones to cut film, may just mess it up! I think I have to narrow down my search to 4x5s or 5x7s in the meantime.
drewbarb
picnic like it's 1999
How do you like the Chamonix, vha? Which model do you have? Imressions, opinions? I'm really curious to try one. I shoot with a Toyo 45 field right now (AII- but I'd switch to the A's reversible back to save weight), but I'm interested in something lighter. The CF is indeed light weight, but you sacrifce some movements and from my experience with the camera, some rigidity and build quality, too. If you shoot with wider lenses, perhaps a Walker camera would serve.Got this one my self, light, enough moments and was lucky to get it 2nd hand for a fair price, 1.4 kg ain´t bad either
http://www.chamonixviewcamera.com/45.html
But if price is more important get a Graflex and spend the rest of the money on a good 150/180mm or 135mm if you prefer more wide angle.
Have my chamonix, 180 nikkor with board, lightmeter and a loupe in a Lowepro Omni sport, just add a tripod and some filmholders and your ready to go
vha
Lots of talk about the Graphics in this thread, and Polaroid conversions like razzle dog appear, but as someone else pointed out, these are very different beasts. Be sure whether you want a view camera to mount on a tripod, or a large format camera to shoot in a similar way to your smaller cameras (i.e. handheld) and choose accordingly. I'd love to have at least one of each type, but as we probably all know, collecting cameras gets in the way. Anyway, that's another thread...
Last edited:
stompyq
Well-known
I vote for the chamonix 45 as the lightest weight "no compramise" general purpose feild camera. I went from a Nagaoka (same as the anba ikeda) which weighed much less to a wista 45 (same as the tachihara) to the chamonix. The nagaoka weighed less but was flimsy and limited lens choices and was a pain to use 'real world'. Only consider this camera if your the type who goes backpacking and cuts up your toothbrush to save weight. The wista was overall a much better sturdier camera untill i tried the chamonix. The chamonix weighs about the same (maybe a little heavier) but is rocksolid when locked down, is more adaptable (graflok back/interchangable bellows) longer bellows (for those longer lenses you'll need for portraits) which it handles very well. Movements are 10x easier to deploy than the wista. The general footprint of both cameras are about the same. I bought my wista for $500 used (and sold it for the same amount) while i bought my chamonix new for a bit more. If you compare to the shen hao i would still go with the chamonix (weight savings, solidity, dosen't have useless feild movements).
Now thats a general lightweight feild camera. If you think your tastes go more towards portraits then i would go with a speed graphic with a functional focal plane shutter. But the ultimate portrait camera in LF (personally) would be the Sinar p2. It weighs a ton but it'll blow all other cameras out of the water period.
Now thats a general lightweight feild camera. If you think your tastes go more towards portraits then i would go with a speed graphic with a functional focal plane shutter. But the ultimate portrait camera in LF (personally) would be the Sinar p2. It weighs a ton but it'll blow all other cameras out of the water period.
spkennedy3000
www.simonkennedy.net
Toyo vx125 - field monorail camera light and just fantastic to use...
Frank Petronio
Well-known
There seems to be some controversy over where the Fresnel gets placed by the Chamonix factory -- I haven't followed it but it's not good PR for what otherwise looks like a popular camera. It got a lot of hype when it first came out but now there are a few threads on the LF Photo forum of why people ditched theirs.
There is no perfect all-around view camera, if you haven't figured that out yet ;-)
The nice thing about the internet is that you can buy one, try it, then try a different style, and pretty much break even with every trade so that you are merely "renting". Once you know what you like, then you can keep it. I tell young women this advice all the time too, I get some queer looks but the smart ones do exactly that!
There is no perfect all-around view camera, if you haven't figured that out yet ;-)
The nice thing about the internet is that you can buy one, try it, then try a different style, and pretty much break even with every trade so that you are merely "renting". Once you know what you like, then you can keep it. I tell young women this advice all the time too, I get some queer looks but the smart ones do exactly that!
oftheherd
Veteran
Hi, guys, thanks.
I think I have to narrow down my search to 4x5s or 5x7s in the meantime.
Indeed you should only do what you are comfortable with. But trying new things is fun in itself, and cutting film with a small paper cutter is rather easy. As to the 9x12, it isn't the be all end all any more that 4x5 cameras are, but all photography is full of trade offs. Again, if you aren't comfortable with it, you won't use it, and your idea will be of no value.
ethics_gradient
Well-known
Although it's often a problem on other field/monorail cameras, the bellows on the Crowns/Speeds seem to hold up a lot better.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Just weighed the Toho set up (note Toho not Toyo). Camera, 120/6.8 Angulon, 2x Grafmatics (12 sheets), MPP tripod, Novoflex head, 4 kg. the lot. Focusing cloth, loupe, meter, hood, filters add about 1 kg more.
Anyone wanting an MPP could do worse than to join the MPP Users Club: www.mppusers.freeuk.com.
Cheers,
R.
Anyone wanting an MPP could do worse than to join the MPP Users Club: www.mppusers.freeuk.com.
Cheers,
R.
Dwig
Well-known
I don't disagree at all.
In the time I used the 90 Angulon I never needed or wanted to use it at a wide aperture. I primarily used it for the classic "rocks and trees" stuff and F/22 was probably my most used stop.
The only time that I remember using it wide was when a played with the antique trick of removing the font cell to double the focal length and get a slightly soft portrait lens. Schneider actually advertised the lens as a convertable in the early days of its production, roughly a century ago, long before the first coated version. Stopped down, the converted lens could deliver a moderately sharp image, but not stellar.
zgeeRF
Established
I agree ! and a question for Frank
I agree ! and a question for Frank
That combination (Crown Graphic with the Xenar) was my entry into the format for little money, as you suggest Frank. Couldn't agree more, especially since... it took a while to use it enough to develop an appetite for more movements and... got a Shen Hao too. Now I know that if the latter was my first LF I would have used it less often. Portability depends not just on the weight but also on how many knoobs you need to turn/adjust before shooting. No wonder the Graphlex was the speedy PJ choice for so long...
The question for Frank: what is the "..the narrow chrome speed adjustment dial" ?
George
I agree ! and a question for Frank
That combination (Crown Graphic with the Xenar) was my entry into the format for little money, as you suggest Frank. Couldn't agree more, especially since... it took a while to use it enough to develop an appetite for more movements and... got a Shen Hao too. Now I know that if the latter was my first LF I would have used it less often. Portability depends not just on the weight but also on how many knoobs you need to turn/adjust before shooting. No wonder the Graphlex was the speedy PJ choice for so long...
The question for Frank: what is the "..the narrow chrome speed adjustment dial" ?
George
kuzano
Veteran
Waiting to weigh a stripped Super Graphic.
Waiting to weigh a stripped Super Graphic.
I've had 2 or 3 of the Super Graphics (one a Super Speed). They are a bit heavier than the other Graflex cameras discussed here.
However, I picked up a "rat" super that would have been prohibitive to restore (on my budget). It was also missing the bellows, so the red button shutter was compromised.
So, I stripped out all the electronics and rangefinder parts that were still attached. It's been sent in for a new bellows, in order for use as a ground glass view camera.
I will also take a half inch off the top when it gets back (the place where all the rangefinder and battery stuff used to live).
When all this is done, I hope to have an all metal graflex that will weigh somewhat less than a Speed or Crown. I have a Fujinar 150W in a small Seiko shutter.
My purpose here is to come up with a durable metal, fairly light, view camera with a bit more movements than the earlier Graflex cameras. The Super had additional front movements over the earlier models, with swing and shift added by Graflex. In addition, there are some tweaks that increase the range of the front movements on the Super and Super Speed front standards.
I will add that the one camera that I haven't seen mentioned here, and is the lightest 4X5 I've packed around is the Gowland Pocket, or the Calumet branded Gowland Pocket. Nothing that I have ever used for 4X5 with considerable movements has ever been lighter than the Pocket's. They show up on eBay 2 or 3 times a year and sell for $150 to $300. They are just a little trickier to lock down the movements (all friction). But, with a lens and shutter, probably about 4 to 5.5 pounds complete.
Waiting to weigh a stripped Super Graphic.
I've had 2 or 3 of the Super Graphics (one a Super Speed). They are a bit heavier than the other Graflex cameras discussed here.
However, I picked up a "rat" super that would have been prohibitive to restore (on my budget). It was also missing the bellows, so the red button shutter was compromised.
So, I stripped out all the electronics and rangefinder parts that were still attached. It's been sent in for a new bellows, in order for use as a ground glass view camera.
I will also take a half inch off the top when it gets back (the place where all the rangefinder and battery stuff used to live).
When all this is done, I hope to have an all metal graflex that will weigh somewhat less than a Speed or Crown. I have a Fujinar 150W in a small Seiko shutter.
My purpose here is to come up with a durable metal, fairly light, view camera with a bit more movements than the earlier Graflex cameras. The Super had additional front movements over the earlier models, with swing and shift added by Graflex. In addition, there are some tweaks that increase the range of the front movements on the Super and Super Speed front standards.
I will add that the one camera that I haven't seen mentioned here, and is the lightest 4X5 I've packed around is the Gowland Pocket, or the Calumet branded Gowland Pocket. Nothing that I have ever used for 4X5 with considerable movements has ever been lighter than the Pocket's. They show up on eBay 2 or 3 times a year and sell for $150 to $300. They are just a little trickier to lock down the movements (all friction). But, with a lens and shutter, probably about 4 to 5.5 pounds complete.
Last edited:
degruyl
Just this guy, you know?
I guess I am not going to bother much with the "lightweight" aspect (which I should, but others have covered it pretty well).
I will comment that I love the graphmatic backs. The only problem is that you really have to put six sheets of the same film in there. It is way too confusing to try to mix and match developing / exposing. In other words, you get six shot "rolls" (OK, magazines).
They are very easy to load, assuming the septums are straight, and pretty easy to operate. And they work well with press cameras. I suspect that working with ground glass would make you lean more towards traditional film holders, but I don't really know. I can't deal with focusing gg.
Best selling point: they are smaller than three film holders.
I will comment that I love the graphmatic backs. The only problem is that you really have to put six sheets of the same film in there. It is way too confusing to try to mix and match developing / exposing. In other words, you get six shot "rolls" (OK, magazines).
They are very easy to load, assuming the septums are straight, and pretty easy to operate. And they work well with press cameras. I suspect that working with ground glass would make you lean more towards traditional film holders, but I don't really know. I can't deal with focusing gg.
Best selling point: they are smaller than three film holders.
ethics_gradient
Well-known
I think regular film holders could complement Grafmatics nicely. I shoot mostly B&W in 35mm, and every once and a while I come across a shot I wish I could switch to color for. I'm still in the process of assembling my Speed Graphic kit, but I think ideally I'd have 2-4 Grafmatics loaded with B&W film, and maybe three or so regular holders for color.
kuzano
Veteran
Consider Quickloads.....
Consider Quickloads.....
I'll have to try a Grafmatic sometime. In the meantime, I use a latest model Kodak Easyload. I use Easyloads and Quickloads. No film loading, no dust problems, use whatever ISO, emulsion, color or B/W, with each shot. Early Kodak Easy Load units had problems, but the last version of the Kodak unit is as reliable as the Fuji Quick Load backs.
Some complain about the expense, and limited selection, but I have about 160 Quick and Easy load envelopes in the freezer. Personally, I don't consider the expense a big issue if you count your time as expense and the freedom from avoiding dust during loading film in backs.
Consider Quickloads.....
I'll have to try a Grafmatic sometime. In the meantime, I use a latest model Kodak Easyload. I use Easyloads and Quickloads. No film loading, no dust problems, use whatever ISO, emulsion, color or B/W, with each shot. Early Kodak Easy Load units had problems, but the last version of the Kodak unit is as reliable as the Fuji Quick Load backs.
Some complain about the expense, and limited selection, but I have about 160 Quick and Easy load envelopes in the freezer. Personally, I don't consider the expense a big issue if you count your time as expense and the freedom from avoiding dust during loading film in backs.
katcons
Established
Guys, I'm currently eyeing a Graflex but it's the body only. No lens, no ground glass, no back. Can you recommend an ebay seller where I can get those three in one go? I checked ebay for the backs, they go pretty fast!
Frank Petronio
Well-known
Just be patient. Some people chop their Graphics down to in order to sell the parts at higher prices, don't fall for that. You want one all set up with the back, lens, and the cam so it all works together -- it will be less expensive and less hassle. Replacing the cam is the bugger on these cameras so just avoid doing if you can. This is the exact model I described (with the narrow-rim rounded aperture shutter):
http://cgi.ebay.com/Graflex-Crown-G...lm_Cameras?hash=item19b880ba08#ht_8709wt_1159
I usually pay about $350 for them in the USA. I think that seller is decent. Search for "Crown, Xenar". The good thing about that seller is that they know what they are selling and you know the rangefinder works, etc. You can find them for $200 but usually the seller doesn't know the camera's ass from its lens (or some other quaint saying).
The Grafmatic holders are nice but they also encourage you to overshoot so I got rid of mine. The pace (I do portraits) is better when you slow down a tad. The weight difference isn't much because the Grafmatics are heavier metal versus light plastic double side 4x5 holders. Also the Grafmatics are expensive and they are more mechanical, as in they fail once in a while or you can accidently buy a bad one... so don't worry about them right away.
mpex.com might have some in stock and Jim Andracki there can put together an entire outfit for you -- holders, loupe, tent, etc. KEH might be good too although the sales people don't know large format as well.
No offense to the RFF experts, but start lurking here: http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/index.php
And read this: http://www.largeformatphotography.info
You'll see some familiar names, these are the two best photo forums on the Internet (http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/index.php is good for digital too).
http://cgi.ebay.com/Graflex-Crown-G...lm_Cameras?hash=item19b880ba08#ht_8709wt_1159
I usually pay about $350 for them in the USA. I think that seller is decent. Search for "Crown, Xenar". The good thing about that seller is that they know what they are selling and you know the rangefinder works, etc. You can find them for $200 but usually the seller doesn't know the camera's ass from its lens (or some other quaint saying).
The Grafmatic holders are nice but they also encourage you to overshoot so I got rid of mine. The pace (I do portraits) is better when you slow down a tad. The weight difference isn't much because the Grafmatics are heavier metal versus light plastic double side 4x5 holders. Also the Grafmatics are expensive and they are more mechanical, as in they fail once in a while or you can accidently buy a bad one... so don't worry about them right away.
mpex.com might have some in stock and Jim Andracki there can put together an entire outfit for you -- holders, loupe, tent, etc. KEH might be good too although the sales people don't know large format as well.
No offense to the RFF experts, but start lurking here: http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/index.php
And read this: http://www.largeformatphotography.info
You'll see some familiar names, these are the two best photo forums on the Internet (http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/index.php is good for digital too).
Last edited:
noci
Established
the lens question also depends on what film formats you want to shoot.... a 90 LF on 6x9 feels like a 40 - 50 mm on 35mm.. use the smaller Fuji instant film and it gets more wide, like a 35.. I pondered that lens question for ages before ending up with a 90 4.5 Caltar - and it offers me the flexibility I need, so I can use the my setup as an insane MF camera with movements.